The story of Parashurama has many serious repercussions because to understand Parshurama, one has to understand caste system, varna system and their interrelation.

India has been and will remain the land which is occupied by various "Jaatis" which share this land and are linked by a common thread of "Sanskriti". Here I present another view of looking towards India from socio-political PoV.

1. Jaati or Castes are those networks of family which lived nearby and were indulging in "roti-Beti vyavaahaara" with each other. Roti-Beti means social security and marital relations to propagate and strengthen the network and its stake in geography or "Desha" of India. Each "Jaati" has their own customs traditions arising out of and modified according to demands and constraints of space and time.

As described elaborately on this blog on countless occasions, Dharma is set of rules which accommodates the drives of each of the components of ecology to evolve and excel. In sociological context, it is set of rules to accommodate needs and aspirations of all the networks/clans/Jaati/castes (all are interchangeable) in desha of India. This dynamic equilibrium of jaati based networks rooted in land of India and connected to each other by thread of dharma is known as "Raashtra".

2. Combinations of such Jaatis living together formed village and so on and so forth. Until the level of village, there is no need of linking these Jaatis together because everyone knowns everyone else.

3. As political, sociological, economic and sanskritik consolidation started, there became necessary to have certain groups which could look at the bigger picture. One of the main pre-requisite of such group is that this group itself should be root-less and possession less. Because since India is very rich geography, it needs to be protected over period of time from newer tribes coming from outside India to settle here. For defending the territory, military consolidation is essential and for that to happen, weaving all the indigenous "Jaatis" in one thread of "sanskriti" is essential since it is real pain in arse to control a huge and diverse geography, that is India without participation of most of Jaatis. This participation comes by giving them stake in "common neighborhood watch".

4. This is where the need to have a Brahmana and Kshatriya arose. Brahmin varna was supposed to draw its cadre from all "Jaatis". Some members of "Jaati" should give up their possessions and become "Jaati-less" and start interacting with similar other "Jaati-less" individuals from other regions, Jaatis. Slowly, there arose necessity to have a link language and an artificial language of "Sanskrit" was designed.

5. The "Kshatriya" too has to be "Jaati-less". A raaja although the "owner" of "rajya", was not supposed to have any property of his own. Raja was head of state and state owned the land and Raja owned the land by the virtue of being head of state. A Kshatriya cadre, just like brahmin cadre, was drawn from all Jaatis. Simply because every Jaati wants to have a "stake" in this order so that they are represented and their issues are addressed.

6. This is difference between Varna and Jaati. Varna is selected cadre drawn for purpose of administration, linkage and sanskritik conversation across the "desha" of India so that India remains not only a "desha (geography)" but also a "Rashtra (nation)" with common civilizational heritage.

7. With time, these Varnas became new "Jaatis" since they started owning property and possessions individually. This owning of property suddenly converts one's vision from civilizational to parochial.

8. There is a reason why it happened so.. Purushaartha system asks every individual to pursue artha and kaama (wealth, power, desire) using just (dharmik) means. Whereas, the Varna specifically asks a person to give up pursuit of individual OR parochial artha and kaama for national or civilizational artha and kaama.

9. This is the reason why in one of my previous posts, I said that Indic dharma requires a certain level of prosperity for functioning. In less prosperous geography and climate, the tree of dharma cannot take root. anyways..

10. While it is known that the members of Brahmin and Kshatriya "Varna" become property-possessing "Jaatis" over the period of time, there was a system which was churning out new individuals to form new line, to replace the "fallen" varnas and take their place and continue the "tantra" (system). During Abrahmic invasions, and more so during British invasions, this system where property-less networks were suddenly churned up to make national level decisions was damaged. The last example which see is house of Peshwa. Of course there are many such examples, Peshwa is just one of them for demonstrating the point.

Example - The caste of Peshwa was "Chitpavan brahmin community". It is interesting to know that this Jaati did not exist before 1720. It was during Marathi translation of Skanda Purana funded by Balaji Vishwanath (father of Bajirao-1) put in the story of 14 dead bodies resurrected by Parashurama and hence origins of Chita(Pyre) Paavan (purified/resurrected) brahmin class. In all previous literature, there is no special word for brahmins from Konkan. They are simply referred to as brahmins. Furthermore, there are many "theories" on origins of this caste (including Jewish, persian, greek, afghan, Berber origin and what not). But this is not the point. The point is, when this community suddenly rose to prominence, they catapulted the expansion of Indic dharma (Bajirao-1, Nanasaheb, Madhavrao-1). They churned the society of India and along with them rose many other lower castes (Shindes and Holkars which were from shepherds and agricultural labour caste) to "Varna" of "Kshatriya" bypassing the traditional 96-clan Maratha kshatriya class of Deccan.

After 3 generations, this community too let go all the steam and Post Madhavrao-1 (post 1772), the maratha movement simply kept existing due to initial momentum generated by these three kings. The reason of their fall (which started from Nanasaheb himself) is their sense of "property" and their attachment to it. Bajirao-1 had nothing to lose as he owned nothing worthwhile. The seats of Baroda, Kolhapur, Nagpur were from elite property owning class and were not much instrumental. Seats of Pune, Indore, Dhar and Gwalior became like Kolhapur,Baroda, Nagpur seats after 1790s. And all this when the Varna-system was totally collapsed in India for 600 years. Whatever manifested in form of this social engineering of India in 1600s and 1700s, was not ideal, yet had its roots in a faint memory of an "utopian Raam Rajya".

11. Everyone gets attached to one's achievements. Once attachments arises, vision narrows and priorities change from expansion to preservation. While both qualities and visions are essential. Dharma withstood the onslaught of 1000 years due to the firmly rooted property owning class which sustained the possibility of dharmik ressurection in India by preserving the bond of Sanskriti. Dharma expanded when the property-less class was propped up to overcome the inertia of rooted class.

12. This is the dynamic of dharma. When "Brahmin" becomes a "Jaati", it loses all its potency. Same is with "Kshatriya".

13. This is where the Parashurama comes in. Parashurama not only shows the struggle to achieve equilibrium sharing of responsibilities, duties and hence power associated with it between the "Brahmin" cadre and "Kshatriya" cadre which is drawn from "all jaatis" in geography of India. It also shows the tendency of inertia and ruthless preservative instinct of those networks which have found roots in property (represented by kaartavirya arjuna) and who go to any extent to preserve their power and keep "things going".

14. The power of Parashurama is in his ability to rebuild a "brahmin" cadre by drawing individuals from "all Jaatis". To be precise, all those Jaatis who in given space and time are dharmik but are not owing much of property, and with bleak prospects. By rebuilding Brahmin cadre, I mean by convincing the property-less "Jaatis" to give up some of their members. And by convincing those members to give up the Jaati-based identity and priorities, give up their personal aarthik and Kaamik aspirations and channelize them towards civilizational and national arthik aspirations. This convincing is tough job.

15. If point 14 is not taken into consideration, within no time, Parashurama becomes Hitler.

Jaati-system (castes) is mainstay of India, while various Jaatis in India (networks/clans/castes/Lobbies) come and go, move up and down. Varna and Ashrama system along with Purushartha system links these Jaatis towards a common goal - that is establishment, preservation and protection of Dharma in prosperous geography of India. If the fail-safe measures to ensure the cleanliness of four-fold systems of Varna-Ashrama-Purushartha are not kept optimally operational with rigorous self-check at regular intervals, the new lines to replace the "fallen" members of Varna won't come up and system will start collapsing. As it did in past 1000 years.

This is one of the main aspect of our "Dharmaarthik" deracination.

If you like this line of thoughts, please continue reading this article.

I am beginning to question the very premise of associating the word "nation" with geography.

see,

there is a word nation.

there is a rashtra

there is a desh

there is state

there is nation-state

while nation-state has confined the people-traditions-language with geography, the other words are not confined by this.

A Jew, his nationality on passport might be french or american or roman or bantu or yuan, his nation was always israel (even if israel did not exist as a nation-state). Ever since Judaism has existed, the rashtra of Jews is Israel. It did not matter whether the rashtra actually associated with geography was materialized. Jews thought and still think their "nation" as Israel. here too, what they mean is exactly similar to when our people talk about rastra and rashtra-vaada.

Desh is any point (or set of points) in space-time. a small dot on your wall is desh and so is asia. this is how patanjali yogsutras define desh. In popular terms it has been used as town OR province OR nation-state in different eras. Until 1950s, the word pardesh was used for vidarbha by a villager living in marathwada (both are regions of Maharashtra). So, the word "desh" has strictly geographical connotations and no ideological OR heritage based connotations. Desh does not describe a group of people with particular common heritage. Rashtra does.

What is nation? What is Rashtra? it is sense of belongingness which people feel arising out of shared heritage. When people feel they are a nation, they become a nation. Ever since Judaism exists, Israel has been the "nation" of Jews. the actual israel came into existence after WW2. But, the nation of Israel existed. Association of "Rashtra" and "Desha" is what is made mandatory by modern socio-polity. While it works in today's world, one has to acknowledge that there existed different systems in different places and times. The shared heritage which produces sense of belongingness can come from anything - language, religion, culture, race. usually, it is complex mixture of all of them with one factor dominating over others. In Europe, that factor is language. In China, that factor is Race (Han ethnicity). In India, that factor has been sanskriti.

There was and is a common sanskritik thread which weaves all "Desh" (Regions) in India. While the rulers of different "Desh" were interacting with each other, the factor which kept the janta interlinked was sanskriti. So whenever a Raja from particular desh would unite substantial portion of subcontinent, other Rrajas would adjust their policies in accordance to the behaviour of the raja of central power. That central power need not unite entire subcontinent politically to create a nation.

In desh of India (which includes entire subcontinent from afghanistan to myanmar), at different times, different quasi-rashtras existed. These quasi-rashtras were ruled by raajas (leader/leaders) either elected or appointed. The commonality which defined quasi rashtras was never language. None of the Indian empire was based on language, in spite of such huge linguistic disparity, this is hallmark of India which sets it distinctively apart from Europe. Otherwise, India is like Europe in many aspects.

Then how did these quasi-rashtras exist? quasi rashtra is term referred to describe regional OR caste based satraps who foster narrower identity than rashtriya one, more and rise to power. Usually on jaati (caste). In history and even today, there are different groups, vying desparately to have larger stake and share in "desh's" property and produce. Its akin to different lobbies trying to win contract. This struck me when I read somewhere that the argument which karunanidhi et al were giving after 2G scam that they brought more money in TN for people of TN. While people have thrown him out of power, showing that there still some good left in the country, this puts a light on how these "rajas" representing their "quasi-rashtras" view "desha" and desha's property.

The Government of India (GOI) functions in similar fashion. Imagine a project is to be discussed to revitalize the transportation of nation and to have a coherent transport policy in India which will efficiently link rail-road-air-ship (riverine and maritime) based means of transport. One has to understand that there is a road lobby, rail lobby, air lobby and two lobbies of ship. these lobbies will fight out with each other like drunk cocks in order to get larger share of funds and more importantly, importance. The problem of India today is importance and money go hand in hand. GOI is infact a place where various lobbies vying for different agendas for India as "desh" on different issues interact with each other (either together or against).

Various rajas of various quasi-rashtras behave similarly in course of history. But then if this was a feature of India dominantly, india would have been perpetually balkanized. this is not the case, like europe, India shows cyclical consolidation. Cycles where these quasi-rashtra identities break down to form a huge monolith and subsequent fragmentation of that monolith with fragments of different shapes. It holds equally true for entire subcontinent. Once a common social-economic-spiritual code is enforced throughout, the political unity does not matter much in India. When that common code is endangered, the fragmented political power unites in India (willingly or forcibly, catalyst of this fusion differs in different times).

Hence I like to talk about river based rashtras. In India the rashtriya identities have been arising along river valleys. now, when we talk about India as a civilizational state based on geography of india, we are in fact talking about sanskriti based on concept of dharma.

The operating system of Sanskriti

Sanskriti is incorrectly translated as culture. Sanskriti's more accurate translation would be "operating system". It has two word roots Complete (Sam) action (KRt). A complete code of justifiable "actions" to be taken in various aspects of personal, spiritual, social and political life of different individuals is sanskriti.

Sanskriti of dharma is an operating system which has been installed and updated in the desh of Indian subcontinent since ancient times. Hence this "sanskriti" is also referred to as "sanatana dharma". Hence most of the rashtra, quasi-rashtras and jaati based identities and polities which emerged, flourished and vanished in this geography were in accordance of this eternal set of guidelines (sanatana dharma) aka Indian operating system.

While this is accepted by everyone, the biggest defeat and one of the fundamental deracinations of Indian sanskriti post 1857 was that the political connotations associated with this word vanished. If it deals with all justifiable actions, the justifiable actions also include war. But Sanskriti has now become a "soft-power" tool onlee. Sanskriti became culture and dharma became religion and Indians lost the identity. Savarkar is very right when he says there are two rashtra's living in India - Hindu and Islam. But I think he meant it in reference of operating system (sanskriti). There is nothing against any particular religious or spiritual view-point in India. We have entertained views and ideological schools of vast degrees. And there was nothing in it which hinted at partition of desh to accommodate two rashtras.

The Road Ahead

India is today at partially consolidated stage. at this stage, a moment of choice will come when India will have to expand OR will collapse. It cannot hold on to this fail-safe point indefinately. Stability after a while in "desh" like India fosters quasi rashtras and pseudo rajas (DMK in kaveri valley, sharad pawar in krishna-godavari valley, many rajas in Ganga Valley). They are modern versions of many of their predecessors in same regions.

A small determined minority can bring in structural change in polity of India. Which are the popular candidates today? Indian army is one such small but determined minority. There are few others maoists, Mullah and Jihadis.There are few more candidates too which I would not enunciate here because that is not the point. Which one of these determined minority will succeed? I don't know. What is the use of any dharmik but silent majority? no use. However, this is just one aspect of coin.

Other aspect is when silent majority is "forced" to take a stand. This is usually brought about by philosophers, saints, thinkers working in tandem with some visionary Raja who has "right" frame of mind and has will, determination and ability for complete reconquest of "desh". Such type of changes bring about overhaul of system.

Once the fissures are produced, it is always in interest of one group to maintain those fissures. It depends upon how well financed that group is and what is their depth in time (in how many generations, will that group fatigue out). In this aspect, Indians are the best. They usually win by tiring out the adversaries (ideas OR enemies) and prevail. But for that there has to be a networking of society. Earlier this was done be roaming brahmins, sanyasis, saints etc.

In modern times, largely owing to their own karma and partially due to political compulsions, the brahmin-sanyasi-sadhu class does not command similar respect. Is there a group which can replace this and do similar function? If yes, then we are moving towards complete overhaul of system which were forced to live in past 1000 years. If not, one of the determined minorities mentioned above will succeed.

Disclaimer: Due apologies, if this article sounds cryptic. Actually it is not and cursory knowledge of Indian world-view will make this post crystal clear.

For the purpose of establishing dharma, first and foremost, one has to understand the subtle undercurrents of Mahakaala Mahadeva (great time). One has to do the tapasya(to strive for) to ensure one is in sync with the mind of Mahadeva just like Sri Raama worshipping Rameshwara before invading Lanka and Arjuna obtaining Paashupata before Kurukshetra great war. Once we are sure that one is in sync with Mahadeva and that He is amicable with the way you are and the way you intend to do your further tapasya, one has to do following.

2. Understand the swabhava and sthiti of the system and decide whether one is better suited to uphold word of dharma OR spirit of dharma. This is very crucial choice. One may wish to be a "Krishna", but one has to analyze in step 1 whether one possess the capability to be one? Perhaps one is more akin to Uddhava OR Bhishma OR Shikhandi and doing that role would suite one. This has to be decided. Wrong choices lead to heart-breaks and incomplete tasks. This happens due to wrong judgement of self out of misplaced sense of self-righteousness. This is the first filter where most of the "candidates" fail.

3. Understand the swabhava and the sthiti of the Loka (people/target market) whom one wishes to mobilize

4. Understand the swabhava and sthiti of recipient. If possible gain the knowledge using all three proofs acknowledged by Shaastras in Nyaya and Samkhya - Pratyaksha (direct observation), Anumaana (intra and extrapolation), Shabda (history).

5. Do necessary changes and make 1, 2 and 3 mutually acceptable and comfortable.

6. Try and judge whether Mahadev requires Dharma to be upheld in Word OR in spirit. This is second filter where many other candidates fail.

7. Once one has accomplished (Siddha artha) these 6 six steps, action must begin.

If one has passed through these 6 rigorous steps of self-examination (Aatma-Pariksha), the confusion seldom arises. Of course, one has to keep returning to each of steps 2-5 and check how system is behaving and change 1 accordingly. One cannot change 1 indefinitely (different "jeevas" have different degree of malleability. Once one reaches that point, stop and hand over the reigns to your shishya (disciple/successor).

This is the most important parameter. While one is going through these 6 steps, one has to train disciples and pass on your understanding in them and let them blossom in their own capacity. When one reaches the point when one can no longer remain malleable and hence relevant, one retires. the civilzed disciples take over the mantle and the movement continues. Failure to produce disciples is the third filter.

For establishment of dharma, one may need to perform in various actions which are dharmik OR asurik over long period of time. The ability of making right choice at right moment depends upon how truly has one made Mahakaala amicable.

If this is done, the deeds per se do not matter. The deeds are usually judged OR perceived by people based whether they were dharmik or not. Some times, it is necessary to follow the system with strict adherence to the premises and laws, just to imprint about the minds of followers the necessity and urgency of doing so.

Sometimes, however, for the greater good, some rules need to be bent, others need to be broken so that the spirit of dharma is salvaged which is being held hostage by puritans and literalists. Both orthodox literalists and unorthodox mavericks are required for the cause of establishment and protection of Dharma in society. One can understand their role by understanding the following simple 2/2 matrix.

For dharma to be established, one needs to make examples. And for making examples, Ravana is as important and necessary as Raama.

What is Asura? What is meant by being Aasurik? Does being "aasurik" always mean being "Adhaarmik"?

Asura refers to a compulsive leadership model. Compulsive and seemingly autocratic leadership per se is not Adharmik on its own as long as there is a robust mechanism of relieving the compulsive leader from his responsibilities once he has served his purpose of establishing OR protecting the Dharma. This is done is two ways- either by changing the leader OR by changing the behavior of leader. More often than not, it is difficult to let go power after having acquired it so meticulously.

This is where being Krishna OR Raama OR Parashurama comes into picture. These "leaders" gave away their power effortlessly after achieving what they had decided of achieving during their tapasya (the 6-step thought process mentioned above). Being Krishna is not enjoying joys oflife alone. Being Krishna is being able to give everything up in moment and stay "untouched" by all attachments.

Only such leader can do what Parashurama OR Krishna OR Raama did and digest the "Karma-Fala" arising out of those actions. Otherwise, one descends into being Ghori OR Gazni OR Aurangzeb or Stalin OR Hitler OR Sahastraarjuna OR Raavana and countless other Asuras in space and times. This is where the circle of this thought process completes itself which started with this article on necessity of concept of Avatar in Indian narrative. It is far more beneficial if society performs the duties well avoiding the total breakdown of the dharmik system. Dharma will be re-established at all costs, if it breaks down, this is sure. But the cost required for the same can be avoided if the state, society and individuals follow and protect the Dharma in the system by taking the necessary small but timely measures.

Not one, not two, sign as many agreements, the head of free India will not bowThis Freedom !!!which is earned after millions of martyrdoms, This Freedom !!! which is irrigated by our blood, sweat and tears,This Freedom !!! which is protected by sacrifice, penance and hardwork by us, This Freedom !!! which is dedicated for upliftment of humanity in sorrow,

Declare this to those who plot against this freedom, that the game of a "spark" is always dangerous,One who wishes to burn the house of neighbor, More often than not ends up burning his own home...Do not dig your grave by your own hands, O Foolish neighbours...

O Myopic neighbours, open you eyes and don't try to barter this freedom, it is pricelessBut what do you know, what freedom is?? When did you ever fight for it?

You won two pieces under the protection of British, Didn't you feel ashamed while partitioning your Motherland?

Don't ever think that you shall protect this kind of freedom by buying American weaponsDon't ever think you shall evade the coming destruction by taking economic aid from Americans,Don't ever think you shall win Kashmir by threats, Jihad and atrocities...

Attacks, atrocities, massacres won't make you bow the head of India..Till Ganga keeps flowing, till the tides in ocean persist,As long as fire still has heat and Sun radiates light,There will be millions of lives and youths ready to willingly sacrifice their life on the altar of Motherland for protection of her freedom

Not Just America, even if entire world is against us, they won't be able to snatch Kashmir from us,Not one, not two, sign as many agreements, the resolve of free India shall never break....